The Three Certainties

The Three Certainties

1. Intention: no int = gift

   • Lambe v Eames: Precatory words
   • Re Adams: 'in full confidence' = gift w/ moral obligation
   • Comiskey: look at the clause in its entirety
   • Re Steele's WT: copied exact wording of will = must have intention
   • Re Diggles: 'it's my desire' = precatory = no trust
   • Paul v Constance: 'as much mine as is yours' = intention via conduct
   • Lassence v Tierney: no intention = full gift to donee

2. Subject Matter: lack off = returns to settlor RT

   • Palmer v Simmonds: 'bulk' not sufficient
   • Re Golay: 'reasonable income' could be ascertained
   • Boyce v Boyce: beneficial interests must be certain
   • Re London Wine Co & Re Goldcorp Exchange: 'homogenous bulk' goods must be separated, clearly defined as yours
   • Hunter v Moss: Shares = choses in action = interchangeable
   • Sprange v Bernard: 'Remaining part of what's left' cannot pin down

3. Objects/Beneficiaries: lack off = void = RT

   • Fixed Trusts
     • IRC v Broadway Cottages: all ben's indentified
     • Re Benjamin: Conceptual and evidential certainty
   • Discretionary Trusts
     • McPhail v Doulton: Individual Ascertainability Test = conceptual certainty
     • Re Baden's WT (No2): 'relatives, dependants, employees of X' okay
     • Re Barlow's WT: 'Friends and Family' okay as offer to buy
     • Re Tucks: 'Jewish Rabhi' 3rd parties may determine who are in the group
     • Ex P West Yorkshire: Administratively unworkable
     • Re Manistry: Capriciousness